President-elect Barack Obama is not Abraham Lincoln. In fact, President George W. Bush has more in common with Lincoln as of this date than Obama.

I felt compelled to write this little commentary after reading one of so many articles (in this case, one published in The University News a week or two ago) comparing Obama with Honest Abe. Those comments frustrate the historian in me. Too often Lincoln’s name is used as a synonym for “greatness.” Losing sight of the man behind the legend is a dangerous game to play.

Ask 10 Americans and I would bet that nine of them, at least, would cite Lincoln as our nation’s greatest president. Ask them for a reason, and I would bet at least half would say something to the effect of “he freed the slaves and won the Civil War.”

Whose name might they give me if I asked them to name a president who dealt with a war nearly his entire time in office and was incredibly unpopular during the course of it? What if I asked which president suspended habeas corpus and locked Americans up without charges in what was later determined to be unconstitutional? What about the four-star general who wrote in a letter that he had tea at the White House with the “original gorilla” and lamented that such a person was “in charge of our affairs” now? The answer to all of them is the same: Abraham Lincoln.

Most troubling is that the aforementioned article spent most of the time gushing over how charismatic and unifying Obama is. This is in conjunction with comparing him to Lincoln. To use them together in such a context seems oxymoronic. Lincoln was a brilliant political strategist: he brought together his party’s factions, but arguably he helped divide the country as never before.

Lincoln was a great president because he saw a crisis looming and understood the terrible responsibility that fell squarely upon him. He was willing to do what it took to end that crisis. Consider the his own words in the following quote:

“If I can save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do that. And if I could save it by freeing all of the slaves, I would do that, and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about slavery . I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever . doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.”

During the campaign, Obama would have been more Lincoln-like had he proclaimed something like “If I can fix (healthcare) by raising everyone’s taxes, I will do that, or if I can fix it by raising no one’s taxes, I’ll do that, or if I can fix it by raising some people’s and leaving others’ alone I’ll do that too.” Did anything he say even remotely come close to such a thing?

I encourage everyone to take a trip to the Lincoln Museum in Springfield, Ill. My favorite room is a “shadow gallery” where copies of newspapers from Lincoln’s era are scattered along the walls. Voices whispering from hidden speakers read bits of the articles. Nearly every article is negative.

Now that he has been elected, his former accomplishments no longer matter.

Perhaps we should wait to give the man a Tony Award until after the curtain has fallen, not before he sets foot upon the stage.

Tim Wright is a third year student in the Saint Louis University School of Law.